Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Our Enemies are on the March-Liberals and Leftists

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    We have underestimated the strength of our enemies. Not that of our enemies abroad: they are being rapidly reduced and defeated. Rather, we have failed to account for the strength of the traitors, seditionists, and subversives here at home and we have neglected to provide adequate plans and resources for their destruction.

    Those who protest, oppose, or criticize this war or the Presidentís conduct of it have blood on their hands: both American and Iraqi. It is their actions which provide hope to our enemies by encouraging them to continue their fight. The protestor, the flippantly anti-war celebrity, and the French-looking Democratic politician are all, by their words and deeds, providing aid and comfort to our enemies.

    Liberals often encourage us to put ourselves in the shoes of those who we oppose. So, let us do just that with the Iraqi ďresistanceĒ and their fellow travellers.

    Suppose that President Bush was at 70% in the polls and therefore had the freedom of action to simply crush any pocket of Iraqi resistance. Marines and GIís storm Fallujah and Najaf, killing thousands of Iraqi (and foreign) fighters while losing only a handful of their own. In actually battles, the Marines and the US Army kill dozens of your fighters for every one of theirs you can wound or kill. Even when you manage to, at great cost, deal them a blow they simply come on coming. America has a seemingly infinite supply of courageous, well-armed, and well-trained young men who have the ability and will to wipe any resisting Iraqi from the very face of the Earth. Individuals who support the resistance face draconian punishments while those who support the Americans get the full benefits of participation in a reviving Iraqi economy.

    If you were an Iraqi, would you fight under such circumstances? The evidence suggests you would not. Left with the choice between American-directed recovery and continued pointless resistance all but the most fanatical of the fanatical Imperial Japanese consented to live under occupation. In a South where one in every ten white men had been killed fighting the North, there was essentially zero irregular warfare following the Southern defeat because everyone recognized its futility.

    History records again and again that most people do not fight for futile causes. A few will, here and there, but most of them end up dead in short order. It is one of the enduring myths of our time that people will fight against ďoccupationĒ even when they have no hope of victory or deliverance. Evidence suggests that this is an utterly fallacious notion.

    So, why do the Iraqi terrorists and their foreign allies still fight? They fight because of John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. They fight because the traitors and subversives in America, along with an Arab and European press that gleefully echoes their ramblings, give those who fight against America hope that if they keep on killing Americans then George W. Bush will be defeated and replaced by someone who will give them what they want. Each bump up in the Democrats poll numbers represents additional American dead, as the appearance of damage to George W. Bush gives increased hope to our enemies.

    Think about it for a second. Suppose that there had been a Presidential election in November 1945 and suppose that, all along the way, the Republican candidate and his party had viciously savaged President Truman for every single decision he made about the war. Suppose that these comments were then picked up and echoed, in turn, first by a partisan domestic media and then an anti-American international media. Imagine that such criticism was vicious enough to hurt his poll numbers and make him demonstrate more restraint than he ought to out of political necessity.

    Do you think the Japanese would have still surrendered in August? Or would they have fought on, bringing more death to America and to themselves, at least until the election was settled? I suspect the latter and Iíve got at least a little bit of real-world evidence to back that up.

    By 1864 most senior Confederates knew that they no longer had any real chance at winning the war on the battlefield. Yet the South fought on. Why? The answer can be found in countless contemporary documents and statements: they believed that President Lincoln would be defeated in the election and replaced by someone willing to negotiate with the Confederacy. Had they known with certainty that Lincoln would be re-elected (and would continue his war policy until the Confederate States were destroyed) it seems likely to me that they would not have resisted as long or as heard. The words of seditionists and traitors during the Civil War gave courage to the enemies of the Union and, therefore, cost lives on both sides.

    If we lose this war it will not be because we have lost it on the battlefield or have failed in a military sense: it will be because a well-organized cabal of traitors whose power extends throughout society have collaborated with our foreign enemies to stab America in the back and bring about her downfall.

    This war is another Vietnam in the sense that our real enemy is not that we are meeting upon the field of battle but rather the enemy within. Our enemies abroad can hurt us: our enemies at home can beat us.

    Can any rational person deny that Michael Moore is a traitor? He is a man who speaks of the virtue of our enemies while producing subversive films whose deliberate intent is to undermine morale at home, among civilian and soldier alike. He is a man who goes abroad to spread lies and slander about America and its President with the obvious purpose of bringing about our defeat in this war. If this is not an example of a man providing aid and comfort to our enemies, then what is?

    Michael Moore should be made an example of. During the Revolutionary War, loyalists were tarred and feathered and sometimes killed. During the Civil War President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus: those who expressed support for the Confederacy were jailed and sometimes even exiled. During the First World War seditious and treasonous material was banned from the mail and subversives were prosecuted to the full extent of the war. During the Second World War all Japanese-Americans were interned, along with individuals known to be pro-fascist. Had war ever broken out with the Soviet Union communists and other fellow travellers would have been jailed.

    In short, during virtually every major American war, subversion, sedition, and treason have been harshly dealt with and civil liberties have been curbed. This is the way things ought to be. This is the way that things must be.

    Vietnam was lost both because seditionists were allowed to run free and because the government failed to take proper action to curb them. Today Kent State is memorialized as a great tragedy because a few traitors (or those stupid enough to stand near them) were killed when, in fact, one of the great tragedies of the war was that there were obviously too few Kent States. 55,000 Americans ultimately died for nothing because of those people. If a few of them would have had to die to curb their disloyal behavior, then so be it.

    We can win the war against the enemy abroad by taking the fight to the enemy at home. Destroy the opponents of this war and youíll convince our enemies that they have no chance of beating us either on the battlefield or at the ballot box.

  2. #2
    don't be Angry just because your beloved Bush sleeps with terrorists..

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@May 7 2004, 12:28 PM
    [b] don't be Angry just because your beloved Bush sleeps with terrorists.. [/b][/quote]
    typical intelligent comeback...much expected :lol:

  4. #4
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,930
    [quote][b] We have underestimated the strength of our enemies. Not that of our enemies abroad: they are being rapidly reduced and defeated. Rather, we have failed to account for the strength of the traitors, seditionists, and subversives here at home and we have neglected to provide adequate plans and resources for their destruction.

    Those who protest, oppose, or criticize this war or the Presidentís conduct of it have blood on their hands: both American and Iraqi.[/b][/quote]

    I got this far before sheer terror overtook me. Apparently, some in the US feel a more USSR-style approach would be best. No freedom of speech. No freedom of action. No dissention. And worst of all, No freedom of thought. And attempt to keep those freedoms should be crushed, preferably by the police state.

    That, and that fact that anyone who dares to go agaonst the USSR-style police state are to be considered ememies of the state and are deemed worthy of destruction.

    That, my freinds, is some scary stuff.

    And it should worry those on EITHER side of the aisle. Someone who takes your freedom of speech today will take your freedom to own guns, your freedom of religion and your freedom of action away just as quickly if they can.

    [quote][b]If a few of them would have had to die to curb their disloyal behavior, then so be it. [/b][/quote]

    But the right is NOT extreme?

  5. #5
    that was the funniest right wing piece of crap I've ever read!
    keep searching..tarring and feathering anti bushers is something saddam would do..
    so if you are against Bush or his BS war in Iraq you are a seditioist and a subversive!!!
    your're a ****in Nazi!

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Warfish,May 7 2004, 12:48 PM]

    Those who protest, oppose, or criticize this war or the Presidentís conduct of it have blood on their hands: both American and Iraqi.[/QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]
    I have to agree with Warfish. This is a pretty irresponsible statement.

    Guys like Teddy K go WAY too far, and embolden the enemy while the fighting is going on, and I think his rhetoric is highly irresponsible, esepcially since it is blatantly motivated by short-term partisan politics.

    But saying that anyone who opposes the war or the President's conduct of it is just absurd, and yes, a little to "thought-policey" for me...to use a Jet Set Junta euphemism (where has he been lately?)

  7. #7
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 7 2004, 12:48 PM
    [b] [quote][b] We have underestimated the strength of our enemies. Not that of our enemies abroad: they are being rapidly reduced and defeated. Rather, we have failed to account for the strength of the traitors, seditionists, and subversives here at home and we have neglected to provide adequate plans and resources for their destruction.

    Those who protest, oppose, or criticize this war or the Presidentís conduct of it have blood on their hands: both American and Iraqi.[/b][/quote]

    I got this far before sheer terror overtook me. Apparently, some in the US feel a more USSR-style approach would be best. No freedom of speech. No freedom of action. No dissention. And worst of all, No freedom of thought. And attempt to keep those freedoms should be crushed, preferably by the police state.

    That, and that fact that anyone who dares to go agaonst the USSR-style police state are to be considered ememies of the state and are deemed worthy of destruction.

    That, my freinds, is some scary stuff.

    And it should worry those on EITHER side of the aisle. Someone who takes your freedom of speech today will take your freedom to own guns, your freedom of religion and your freedom of action away just as quickly if they can.

    [quote][b]If a few of them would have had to die to curb their disloyal behavior, then so be it. [/b][/quote]

    But the right is NOT extreme? [/b][/quote]
    my sentiments exactly warfish......pretty scary stuff indeed.........you read 4 more words than I did, though I did quickly scan the rest searching for a reasonable paragraph or even sentence, to no avail

  8. #8
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,930
    Lets be real here: SOME of the Leftists & Democrats DO go too far in their use of "Freedom of Speech", going beyond legitimate criticism or concern.

    And I am no fan of Ted Kennedy especially.......

    But to imply that anyone who thinks differently should be put to death, as this article does, is a bit extreme and goes against everything the USA stands for, namely FREEDOM.

  9. #9
    5ever & warfish, it is your consistently well thought out posts that keep me coming back to this board.

    like it or not, Bush has entered the US in a war with Iraq. I too do not like Kennedy or anyone else in the public eye denouncing the efforts of this administration in that regard, especially when the reason is for political gain of their party. Just like I hated the likes of Tom Delay & co when they could not get over the fact Clinton got a bj in the oral office,mainly for political gain.
    I am dissapointed that the mighty war room we have came up with such a lousy exit ,turnover strategy though

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us